D.o.F:12/05/2010

D.o.O:30/9/2011

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                             CC.NO.109/10

                     Dated this, the 30th     day of September 2011

PRESENT:

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                         : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                             : MEMBER

Kunhikannan.T, S/o Pokkan,

Pallot,Ajanur Po, Hosdurg.                         : Complainant

(in person)

1. A.Vijayarajan,Managing Director,

    Prathibha Finance, S/o K Kannan,

    Prabhalayam  Mudiyakkal,                      :

    Po.Bekal,Kasaragod

 2.Thankamani, W/o Vijayarajan,

     Director,   Prathibha Finance,  Mudiyakal,

     Po.Bekal,Kasaragod                                       : Opposite parties

3. Ganga,   D/o Ambadi(late),

    Director,   Prathibha Finance,

    Kariyanthottathil, Vengad,Po.Panayal ,Hosdurg.

 (Subash Bozz.V.M,Adv,Kasaragod)

                                           ORDER

SMT.P.RAMADEVI         : MEMBER

  The facts of the complaint in brief are as follows:

  That the complainant had deposited an amount of `1,00,000/- with the opposite parties, the  Prathibha  Business group attracted with their  interest rate.  The opposite parties offered `.17000/-as interest for `1,00,000/- for 13 months.  The complainant deposited the amount on 15/10/07 and obtained a deposit receipt.  The deposit was matured on 15/11/2008, the complainant approached opposite parties many times to refund matured deposit  but he evaded his request.  The complainant was suffering  from comeal  ulcer in his eyes and  the doctor advised him for an operation in the  month of August,2009 and for the operation he has to   spend `50,000/-.  Hence the complainant again approached the opposite parties  asked  to pay collect an amount of 50,000/- for his operation purpose.  But the opposite parties have not heeded his request.  Then the complainant availed a hand loan of `50,000/- for his operation  purpose and for that he paid  ` 10,000/- as  interest. So far the deposit amount is not received by the complainant from opposite parties .  Hence the complaint.

    Here the opposite party appeared through counsel and  filed version denying  all the allegations made  against them  by the complainant.  According to opposite parties they received the deposit from the complainant and  issued deposit receipt and paid the entire amount.  At the time of  making  repayment the complainant promised  that he will surrender the deposit receipt.  But the complainant did not do so.  Hence the deposit receipt is with the complainant  and the complaint has no merit it is liable to be dismissed.

3.     Here the evidence consists of the evidence of PW1  the complainant and Exts.A1 to A4 documents.  No documents  filed on the side of opposite parties.  Heard both sides.

4.  After considering the facts of the case the following issues  are raised for  consideration

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the  part of  opposite parties

2. If so what is  the  relief  as to costs and compensation?

5.   In this case there is no dispute regarding the deposit of amount by the complainant.  The dispute is only with regard  to the  repayment of the deposit with interest.  According to opposite parties they paid the entire amount of deposit with interest but the complainant  has failed to return back the deposit receipt.  Considering this  dispute the forum  looked into  the factum of sustainability of the contention of opposite parties ?  The opposite parties are the directors  of Prathibha Group of companies.  This company is dealing with many types of   business.  We cannot accept a firm doing  money transactions will  pay the deposit money with interest without getting back  the deposit receipt.  If it is paid at least they will obtain receipts for the payment.  The contention of the opposite parties is unbelievable and  it will not sustained.  We are of the  opinion  that there is no chance by the opposite parties paying  the deposited amount with interest to the complainant.  That means there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and the complainant is entitled to get the deposit amount with interest from the opposite parties.

   The 2^nd issue is  regarding the cost and compensation.  Whether the  complainant  is entitled for a compensation.  According to him he had undergone an operation.  Due to the financial stringency  caused by the  act of  opposite parties the complainant constrained to take hand loan from one Kunhiraman for that he paid `10,000/-  as interest.  Exts.A2 to A4 reveals that he had undergone operation and he is under the treatment of Dr.Kulkkarni.  But  he has not produced any evidence either oral or documentary  to show that he had availed hand loan from one Kunhiraman Pallathil.  Hence we are not in a position to allow such plea of the  complainant.

  Therefore the complaint is allowed and the opposite parties are  directed to pay       ` 1,17,000/-(Rupees one lakh seventeen thousand only)  to the complainant with interest @9%  per annum from the date of complaint till payment and also directed to pay `3000/- as cost of the proceedings.  Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 

Exts:

A1- deposit receipts

A2-cash receipt

A3-6/9/09- case report

A4-Discharge instructions

PW1-Kunhikannan-complainant

Sd/                                                                                   Sd/                                                             Sd/

MEMBER                                         MEMBER                        PRESIDENT

eva                                                                               /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                                     SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT